Can a non hunter accompanying a hunter in the field?

[Gateholio]

Thank you for your email dated October 29, 2015, regarding a non hunter accompanying a hunter in the field.



Non-hunters that are not in possession of a firearm may accompany a hunter and the non hunter is not required to be in possession of a hunting licence.



The Wildlife Act definition of hunt is:



"hunt" includes shooting at, attracting, searching for, chasing, pursuing, following after or on the trail of, stalking or lying in wait for wildlife, or attempting to do any of those things, whether or not the wildlife is then or subsequently wounded, killed or captured,

(a) with intention to capture the wildlife, or

(b) while in possession of a firearm or other weapon;



If an individual is doing an activity that is captured in the definition of hunt they are required to possess all appropriate hunting licenses. Many non-hunting people participate in the activity of hunting; if the accompanying individual is not meeting the definition of hunt (i.e. is not in possession of a firearm or other weapon) they would not require a hunting licence and may accompany a licensed hunter. People that are in the field and not in possession of a firearm or other weapon (and do not intend to capture wildlife) would not be meeting the definition of hunting and would not require a hunting licence.



A non-hunter may accompany a hunter on their hunt and observe, there are no regulations against that, in fact it is encouraged that hunters mentor and initiate non-hunters into the sport. The non-hunter can assist in packing harvested wildlife out of the field, however ensure that the licensed hunter accompanies the meat at all times unless the non hunter is in possession of a completed “record of receipt for transporting wildlife”, found on page 24 of the 2012-2014 Hunting and Trapping Regulations Synopsis available online at http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife...g/regulations/ (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/regulations/).

[Surrey Boy]

Excellent information to know. Thanks for posting.

[Taurusguy]

I had a CO give my buddy a written warning for hunting with no licence while he was riding in my truck as we were heading to a spot for target practice up skagit valley. He was holding my gun and my daughters gun in his lap. (Daughter had licence but buddy was too big to sit in back seat so he held our eapons). My buddy did have a gun licence tho... And when we walked around in the bush he was holding a camera... Only held guns while we were traveling in the truck. But I am glad someone got this question answered. The CO said technically he was hunting because he was shotgun in the truck and holding my and my daughters guns... Lame...

[warnniklz]

What if your buddy is packing a twelve in the east kootneys while you're calling elk?

[caddisguy]

I had a CO give my buddy a written warning for hunting with no licence while he was riding in my truck as we were heading to a spot for target practice up skagit valley. He was holding my gun and my daughters gun in his lap. (Daughter had licence but buddy was too big to sit in back seat so he held our eapons). My buddy did have a gun licence tho... And when we walked around in the bush he was holding a camera... Only held guns while we were traveling in the truck. But I am glad someone got this question answered. The CO said technically he was hunting because he was shotgun in the truck and holding my and my daughters guns... Lame...

He should have no problem fighting the fine. He needs to be in a possession of a firearm *and* looking for animals. There is no reference in the definition of hunting to "riding shotgun" (that is not mutually inclusive with any aspects defining hunting)

If he admitted to looking for animals or was seen glassing it would be more questionable. Could still argue the firearms were in transportation and could not be used for hunting while being transported, though the wording (possession) does not leave leave much wiggle room, reducing that arguement to letter of the law versus spirit of the law.

[Taurusguy]

He was lucky... No fine.. Just got a written warning. He was in passenger seat.. Holding my gun and my daughters gun, who was sitting in back seat, cuz he is too big to sit back there...

[J_T]

Good information.

In the case of an early season bowhunter who may want to take someone along (who has no intention of killing) who carries a rifle as protection. And this additional person has all of the required firearms licensing in place. What then?

If the additional person has no weapon, but is spotting, or calling? Are they in contravention?

[jconn]

Good information.

In the case of an early season bowhunter who may want to take someone along (who has no intention of killing) who carries a rifle as protection. And this additional person has all of the required firearms licensing in place. What then?

If the additional person has no weapon, but is spotting, or calling? Are they in contravention?

Lots of grey areas here. By the letter of the law, if the person carrying a rifle for protection is "shooting at, attracting, searching for, chasing, pursuing, following after or on the trail of, stalking or lying in wait for wildlife" then they are meeting the definition of hunting. It might be possible to convince a CO/judge that your friend is not searching for wildlife, but rather just following you around. I probably wouldn't want to test that out though.

Not sure on the spotting or calling one. Even though they don't have the "intention to capture the wildlife", I can see how someone would view their intention of helping you to do that as being basically the same thing.

I would email the CO service (that's how I got the above stickied response in the first place) and see what they say and then just print out their response and keep it with you. Easier thing would be for the friend to come along with no weapon, not doing any hunting related stuff and be 100% sure you're not gonna get popped for illegally hunting.

[J_T]

^^ Thanks for the response. Just to be clear, the scenarios I presented are theoretical and based on my own observations of seeing others in the field.

However, in a personal experience, i was confronted and investigated while not carrying a knife, binoculars, or bow, but accompanying my 83 year old Father on a whitetail hunt. It took two years and court to resolve.

[Gateholio]

This thread remains open and anyone can reply to it, if you are having issues please check your computron

[HarryToolips]

Great info thanks.......

[dustybeat]

I stopped a CO yesterday to ask some of these questions.
1.carrying a shotgun for protection while bow hunting whitetail deer during a bow only season. Cos discretion, he said if he were to come across someone "hunting" while carrying a firearm in a bow only season he would write them up.
2. The definition of "experienced" hunter when it come to the initiation license. Co said, mentor Hunter must have held license for 5 years. 3 of which you must have filled big game tags. Birds are a different story though.

[jconn]

I stopped a CO yesterday to ask some of these questions.
1.carrying a shotgun for protection while bow hunting whitetail deer during a bow only season. Cos discretion, he said if he were to come across someone "hunting" while carrying a firearm in a bow only season he would write them up.
2. The definition of "experienced" hunter when it come to the initiation license. Co said, mentor Hunter must have held license for 5 years. 3 of which you must have filled big game tags. Birds are a different story though.

Neither of these are really directly applicable to the topic of this thread. The thread is about someone who is not hunting joining a hunter in the field.

I'd be interested in what the legislation is that applies to the first point - does anyone know?

With regards to number 2, this definition is categorically false and takes away from the purpose of this thread as being a source for reliable information. From the government website (same info in the regs):
The prescribed qualifications to be a supervising hunter are


the person must be a “resident” of B.C. and hold a resident hunting licence other than an initiation hunting licence (or be exempted from holding a licence),
the person must have held a hunting licence in B.C. (other than an initiation hunting licence) or a licence to hunt elsewhere in not fewer than 3 of any of the licence years preceding the current licence year (or be exempted from holding a licence),
if the person is an Indian residing in B.C., paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply and the person must have received training in hunting and previously hunted lawfully without supervision, and
the person must not be prohibited from carrying a firearm.

There is no requirement for having successfully filled tags in 3 out of 5 years, and no separate conditions for big game vs. birds. I'm guessing you're confusing the initiation license with Permit to Accompany where the BC resident who is accompanying the non-resident must have held (not filled) a big game species license for 3 of 5 preceding years.

[Barracuda]

This is true with the exception of using a dog. if a person is pusueing an animal with the use of a their dog and they are not a hunter then they are in violation .



so if I go out hunting with frank and his dogs (and I have my dogs and a license+firearm) and he is without a license and we strike a track and after a long pursuit we finally tree the jacaklope and a CO hears the commotion and happens to shows up at the tree at the same time ,watch out because here comes the violations ticketfest even though frank doesn't have a firearm.

[wideopenthrottle]

it is a sad catch 22 cuz as a "casual observer" it is very difficult to prove you did not have an intent to kill wildlife (while appearing like a hunter) so they have to go with "if it looks like a duck"...

[OneStevo]

so just to be clear, if i have a buddy who wants to tag along for a hunt, and just help pack out game/or a friend who is interested in taking up hunting, am i right in thinking he can't even have bino's around his neck, because by the letter of the Wildlife Act, that would be considered "searching for" wildlife?

[Xenomorph]

so just to be clear, if i have a buddy who wants to tag along for a hunt, and just help pack out game/or a friend who is interested in taking up hunting, am i right in thinking he can't even have bino's around his neck, because by the letter of the Wildlife Act, that would be considered "searching for" wildlife?


Had my dad with me and CO and I spoke. No issue whatsoever. My dad helped me gut, drag and load the bear. It was an intense day for other reasons, but there was no issue with him being a non hunter accompanying me.

[AgSilver]

so just to be clear, if i have a buddy who wants to tag along for a hunt, and just help pack out game/or a friend who is interested in taking up hunting, am i right in thinking he can't even have bino's around his neck, because by the letter of the Wildlife Act, that would be considered "searching for" wildlife?

It raises a good legal question as to whether assisting the hunter with the hunt counts as hunting (i.e. if your buddy is searching to help you kill an animal). One would think that in most scenarios, assisting someone to do something counts as effectively doing the act (i.e. think "aiding and abetting" or "parties to an offence" if looking at the Criminal Code). But how does that translate to assisting someone who is doing something legal, even if it's not legal for the "assistant" to do the act?

In theory, as it (i.e. a non-hunter accompanying a hunter) doesn't seem to be expressly disallowed, it should be considered to be permitted; however, it could depend on what the non-hunter does while in the field. There's definitely room for interpretation that it could be considered hunting to glass a cut looking for deer on behalf of the guy with the gun. If he's just hanging out with you and not doing any of that, then definitely no issue.

Probably best to ask the COs.

[NChunter]

Thank you for your email dated October 29, 2015, regarding a non hunter accompanying a hunter in the field.



Non-hunters that are not in possession of a firearm may accompany a hunter and the non hunter is not required to be in possession of a hunting licence.



The Wildlife Act definition of hunt is:



"hunt" includes shooting at, attracting, searching for, chasing, pursuing, following after or on the trail of, stalking or lying in wait for wildlife, or attempting to do any of those things, whether or not the wildlife is then or subsequently wounded, killed or captured,

(a) with intention to capture the wildlife, or

(b) while in possession of a firearm or other weapon;



If an individual is doing an activity that is captured in the definition of hunt they are required to possess all appropriate hunting licenses. Many non-hunting people participate in the activity of hunting; if the accompanying individual is not meeting the definition of hunt (i.e. is not in possession of a firearm or other weapon) they would not require a hunting licence and may accompany a licensed hunter. People that are in the field and not in possession of a firearm or other weapon (and do not intend to capture wildlife) would not be meeting the definition of hunting and would not require a hunting licence.



A non-hunter may accompany a hunter on their hunt and observe, there are no regulations against that, in fact it is encouraged that hunters mentor and initiate non-hunters into the sport. The non-hunter can assist in packing harvested wildlife out of the field, however ensure that the licensed hunter accompanies the meat at all times unless the non hunter is in possession of a completed “record of receipt for transporting wildlife”, found on page 24 of the 2012-2014 Hunting and Trapping Regulations Synopsis available online at http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife...g/regulations/ (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/regulations/).

Who would I email or how can I get an official copy of this letter? My brother in law may tag along with me this weekend he's thinking of getting his core in the new year. thanks

[adriaticum]

Who would I email or how can I get an official copy of this letter? My brother in law may tag along with me this weekend he's thinking of getting his core in the new year. thanks

NC hunter what?
North Carolina?

[Bonz]

that isnt a letter that i read. you go to vendor and buy the initiation licence for the guest

Initiation Licence The initiation hunting licence is a mentoring licence that allows a person, 18 years of age or older, who has never previously held a hunting licence in British Columbia, to try hunting for a one-year period.
The requirements to complete Conservation & Outdoor Recreation Education and to hold a FWIDare waived for this one-time-only licence.
The initiation hunting licence can be purchased at any Service BC office or local vendor. The licence costs $19.00 ($15.00 licence fee plus $4.00 Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation surcharge).
To be eligible for the initiation hunting licence, a person:


Must be a B.C. resident
Must be 18 years or older
Must not have held a B.C. hunting licence in the past, with the exception of a youth hunting licence
Must be under the close personal supervision of a licensed adult who satisfies the qualifications to be a supervising hunter

Supervising Hunter for an Initiation Hunter A person who holds an initiation hunting licence must be accompanied by, and under the close personal supervision of, a supervising hunter who is 18 years of age or older and meets the prescribed qualifications. It is an offence for an initiation hunter to hunt without a supervising hunter.
The prescribed qualifications to be a supervising hunter are:


The person must be a resident of B.C. and hold a resident hunting licence other than an initiation hunting licence (or be exempted from holding a licence)
The person must have held a hunting licence in B.C. (other than an initiation hunting licence) or a licence to hunt elsewhere in not fewer than three of any of the licence years preceding the current licence year (or be exempted from holding a licence)
If the person is an Indian residing in B.C., paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply and the person must have received training in hunting and previously hunted lawfully without supervision
The person must not be prohibited from carrying a firearm

If the holder of an initiation hunting licence is hunting with a licensed guide, item (b) of the prescribed qualifications does not apply to the supervising hunter.
The supervising hunter may accompany no more than:


Two initiation hunting licence holders at one time
One youth and one initiation licence holder at one time

[Slinky Pickle]

Who would I email or how can I get an official copy of this letter? My brother in law may tag along with me this weekend he's thinking of getting his core in the new year. thanks

If your B.I.L. is not carrying a firearm then there is no issue at all and you don't need to carry any kind of letter with you. If he wants to actually hunt, then you will need the Initiation Hunting License. Of course your B.I.L. can only get an Initiation Hunting License if he is a BC resident.

[NChunter]

If your B.I.L. is not carrying a firearm then there is no issue at all and you don't need to carry any kind of letter with you. If he wants to actually hunt, then you will need the Initiation Hunting License. Of course your B.I.L. can only get an Initiation Hunting License if he is a BC resident.

Thanks. That was my understanding of it. I will be the only one with a rifle so I think we should be fine, I did I search on the subject and it seemed there was some stories of COs interpreting thing differenitly. I believe the letter at the start of this thread was a response from ministry official just thought it may save some hassle.

[Bonz]

just email a c.o. yourself and get a copy of his words. mention where your going so you get the c.o. in that area. since we see them interpret stuff differently at times

[the bear]

Valid firearms licence is all you need to pack a firearm whether walking in bush or not. Until something is dead you are just walking around with your Legal firearm

[Barracuda]

but if you are with someone that is hunting then you are considered hunting .

[J_T]

A word of caution. Emailing a CO will give you one persons opinion. Not much different than on here. Until the moment you and your buddy encounter a CO and that CO makes a determination, you won't know where you stand. Not until you are in a court of law and testing it against the legislation. Ask me how I know.

[Linksman313]

A word of caution. Emailing a CO will give you one persons opinion. Not much different than on here. Until the moment you and your buddy encounter a CO and that CO makes a determination, you won't know where you stand. Not until you are in a court of law and testing it against the legislation. Ask me how I know.

Heh heh heh, love that last line JT

[wideopenthrottle]

A word of caution. Emailing a CO will give you one persons opinion. Not much different than on here. Until the moment you and your buddy encounter a CO and that CO makes a determination, you won't know where you stand. Not until you are in a court of law and testing it against the legislation. Ask me how I know.

heheh..knowing the law doesnt always "impress" law enforcement...you know, like when an officer "says come with me", you can ask if you are under arrest and if the answer is "no" then you are free to refuse to go with them...if they then "touch" you you could be considered "under arrest" but if you ask them "what am i being charged with" they are supposed to tell you a charge but i was once told " oh i don't know, we'll think of something"...winning in court later doesnt change the fact that your night (or hunting trip) was ruined

[J_T]

...winning in court later doesnt change the fact that your night (or hunting trip) was ruinedPrecisely my point. Ruined a hunt and took two years of uncertainty to resolve. I'm still hunting and he is no longer a CO.

[warbird2006]

I had my wife accompanying me for few years. But she was annoying, asking weird questions all the time, so I paid her for a hunting course and PAL. many problems solved.

[rbest]

I had my wife accompanying me for few years. But she was annoying, asking weird questions all the time, so I paid her for a hunting course and PAL. many problems solved.

hahaha! Nice one

[sumonda]

This is good to know.. I had wondered this a couple weeks ago. My wife came grouse hunting with me as an observer, She has a firearms license so I thought it would be ok for her to carry my 30-06 just in case I spotted a deer and I could hand off my 410 and not loose the opportunity... any way turns out we had no luck with either that day, but I started thinking maybe she shouldn't have been holding my deer rifle - now we know and she will have to take the CORE and get her hunting license.

[Yuritau]

Valid firearms licence is all you need to pack a firearm whether walking in bush or not. Until something is dead you are just walking around with your Legal firearm


but if you are with someone that is hunting then you are considered hunting .

More than a year late, but I think it's important to correct these mistakes. It's been posted in this discussion already, but it's good to keep in mind; the legal definition of "hunt" from the Wildlife Act:


"hunt" includes shooting at, attracting, searching for, chasing, pursuing, following after or on the trail of, stalking or lying in wait for wildlife, or attempting to do any of those things, whether or not the wildlife is then or subsequently wounded, killed or captured,

a) with intention to capture the wildlife, ***or***
b) while in possession of a firearm or other weapon;

Look at the OR that I have highlighted. It does not matter if you INTEND to harvest an animal, nor does it matter who you are with. If you are walking around in the bush while in possession of a firearm or other weapon (what counts as an "other weapon" is not defined, so don't push it), it's not only possible for a CO to assume that you are hunting, it is REASONABLE for a CO to assume you are hunting.

Also very important, look at the portion of the definition that I have underlined. It does not matter if you ever even try to wound, kill, or capture an animal. If you are engaging in any of the nine activities listed and you satisfy either a) or b) in the eyes of the CO, you are hunting.

You might be able to convince the CO or a judge that your firearm was strictly for defense against dangerous animals, but I would never want to rely on that.

[Quiet Hunter]

Very good info. Thanks guys

[guntech]

If I was not hunting and with someone who was hunting I would simply have a camera with me at all times and no firearm.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Way too many Rules and Regulations for hunting and fishing ! JMO RJ

[MRP]

Stop over thinking things. Seams crazy this made it as a sticky. Unstick it move on.

[HappyJack]

A word of caution. Emailing a CO will give you one persons opinion. Not much different than on here. Until the moment you and your buddy encounter a CO and that CO makes a determination, you won't know where you stand. Not until you are in a court of law and testing it against the legislation. Ask me how I know.

If that opinion is from a Peace Officer and in writing...it's legal to follow that advice even if it's wrong.

[HappyJack]

Way too many Rules and Regulations for hunting and fishing ! JMO RJ

Agreed, they should pare them down a bit it's no wonder that more than half the guys can't get things right. Some of the rules are just plain unreasonable nonsense, like this discussion.

Just because you're packing the tools [firearm] doesn't mean you are 'hunting' until you actually take the step into poaching, so technically you would be poaching and where is the definition of that?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

If I was not hunting and with someone who was hunting I would simply have a camera with me at all times and no firearm.

One day I might return to BC to act as a packer for my partner. I have a valid PAL and am allowed to pack a firearm in the bush for self defence. IMO I’d be a fool not to pack a firearm in the mountains of northern BC with meat on my back and not pack a firearm. Now, I’m sure a shotgun or open sight 45-70 might draw less of a possible problem but I’ll be packing something regardless.

SSS

[Redthies]

One day I might return to BC to act as a packer for my partner. I have a valid PAL and am allowed to pack a firearm in the bush for self defence. IMO I’d be a fool not to pack a firearm in the mountains of northern BC with meat on my back and not pack a firearm. Now, I’m sure a shotgun or open sight 45-70 might draw less of a possible problem but I’ll be packing something regardless.

SSS

This will be your good friend. Very unlikely any CO would consider this a hunting firearm. You “could” hunt with it, but why would you? I have one as a “truck/camp gun”. For the money, you can’t go wrong.

https://www.reliablegun.com/en/akkar-churchill-612-synthetic-pump-action-shotgun-12ga-3-12-matte-black-synthetic-stock-4rds-rifle-front-sight-fixed-cylinder